Search

The war in Europe is currently in the hands of spies and secret service agents. We are really in a second "cold" war, fought so far with sabotage and by minor players, but as always, it is very difficult to distinguish the true from the false, the official releases from the truth. (translated)

Luca Di Montezemelo, ancien président de Ferrari, est revenu sur les échanges radios des pilotes Ferrari à Zandvoort. 👀 Selon lui, le responsable n’est pas Fred Vasseur, mais les dirigeants de Ferrari qui ne le soutiennent pas assez. « Après la dernière course aux Pays-Bas, j’ai entendu des critiques envers Fred Vasseur parce qu’il n’avait pas donné de consigne d’équipe entre Hamilton et Leclerc. Mais, au-delà de cet épisode, nous devrions tous nous demander avec qui le dirigeant français peut échanger au sein de l’entreprise. Je ne veux pas passer pour un nostalgique, mais je me souviens que lorsque Todt, en Autriche, avait ordonné à Barrichello de laisser Schumacher gagner parce que, que cela soit juste ou non aux yeux du public, c’était dans l’intérêt de l’écurie, le Brésilien s’était beaucoup plaint. Moi, qui étais le président, je l’ai fait venir et je lui ai dit : je représente Ferrari, tu es l’un de nos employés. Si les décisions de Todt ne te conviennent pas, tu peux toujours chercher une autre équipe. Je ressens la solitude de Vasseur. Qui lui couvrirait les arrières s’il devait prendre une décision, peut-être même impopulaire ? » #F1 #MonzaGP #F1 #Ferrari #Zandvoort

Acabei de ver o vídeo de bastidores da Galo TV (excelente, por sinal), e só um comentário: ASSUSTADORA a liderança que o Fred já exerce no vestiário do Galo com DIAS de clube. Parece que o cara joga no Atlético há 10 anos. Ser torcedor faz TODA a diferença. Cara tava simplesmente puxando um “quem ficar parado vai tomar um tá ligado” no vestiário, com a faixa no braço, depois de colocar um Atlético x Cruzeiro no bolso. Credo! Craque, craque, craque, de bola e de ambiente. #AtléticoMG #Fred #Futebol

Fredrik Ulvestad będzie kontynuował swoją karierę w Odense Boldklub. Pogoń Szczecin osiągnęła porozumienie z duńskim klubem w sprawie darmowego transferu definitywnego norweskiego pomocnika. Szczegóły 👉 https://t.co/cjms8j2bIw Dziękujemy za Twoje zaangażowanie i pracę, którą włożyłeś w rozwój naszego klubu, Fredrik! Zarząd klubu oraz pracownicy życzą Ci powodzenia w dalszej karierze! 🤝 #transfery #piłkaNożna #OdenseBoldklub

Two French directors, Gaël Mocaër and Sebastian Perez Pezzani, as well as their Togolese collaborator Fred Vedomey, detained in Togo since the end of July for "false statements," have been granted provisional release, according to their lawyer and the NGO Reporters Without Borders. (translated)

Lembrando que o Fred Luz queria rever o contrato da Arena, que aparentemente, estava lesando o clube. Fred Luz foi derrubado por pressão dos nobres conselheiros do próprio Corinthians. Significa que, para muita gente, um Corinthians endividado interessava MUITO. #Corinthians #Futebol #GestãoEsportiva

O Galo recebeu R$ 9 milhões de premiação por ter avançado para a semifinal da Copa do Brasil. O volante e atleticano Fred, decisivo no jogo das quartas de final contra o Cruzeiro, custou aproximadamente R$ 15 milhões aos cofres do clube. Praticamente “se pagou”. É o que a torcida inteira fala: craque decide jogo. Craque faz a diferença. Espero que, na próxima janela de transferências, sejam feitos movimentos como esses. 📸 Pedro Souza/Atlético-MG #CopaDoBrasil #AtléticoMG #FutebolBrasileiro

"O que aconteceu na Arena MRV precisa ser estudado. É algo histórico e que deveria ser passado à frente. O que o Eduardo Dominguez fez hoje, depois que o Galo ficou com um jogador a mais, 90% dos técnicos que atuam no futebol brasileiro não fazem." "Em momento nenhum, adotou a estratégia de jogar a bola na área a esmo. Fez questão de trabalhar por dentro, com os jogadores o tempo todo tabelando. Aumentou a participação dos jogadores pelos lados e, principalmente, deixou que o Fred assumisse o protagonismo dessa criação do Galo. Envolveu o Cruzeiro de uma forma que poucas vezes eu vi." "Então, assim, ele não fez isso diante de um treinador inexperiente, de um treinador que está começando, nem de um time enfraquecido. Fez isso diante do Cruzeiro, o maior rival do Galo. O Galo foi, acima de tudo, organizado." "É lógico que colocou o sangue, é lógico que teve intensidade, é lógico que teve qualidade para poder finalizar. O Galo jogou o máximo contra o Cruzeiro quando estava 0 a 0, quando estava 1 a 0 e, depois, construiu a sua vantagem da forma mais justa possível." "Vitória justíssima de um time que já vem demonstrando há algum tempo que merece ser respeitado no cenário nacional. Não é mais o Galo bagunçado. Esse Galo é protagonista." 🎙️ Matheus Emanuel, no @CharlaPodcast. 📸 Pedro Souza/Atlético-MG #Futebol #AtléticoMG #Galo

Pourquoi avoir choisi de renouveler votre contrat avec Ferrari pour une durée aussi longue ? Charles : « J'entretiens une relation étroite avec Fred, et il partage sa vision de l'équipe, les choix que nous avons faits pour la voiture de cette année et ce qui se passera dans les années à venir. Ce n'était pas une décision prise après de simples discussions avec Ferrari, ni simplement par désir de rester ici. Il y a eu des échanges, et au final, le projet qui m'a le plus enthousiasmé a toujours été Ferrari. Gagner ici est mon rêve, mais ma décision ne reposait pas uniquement sur mon amour pour Ferrari, mais aussi sur le projet. Je voulais saisir toutes les opportunités pour prendre la bonne décision, celle qui me donnerait les meilleures chances de devenir champion du monde, et je suis convaincu que Ferrari est l'équipe capable d'y parvenir. » Pouvez-vous l'expliquer plus clairement ? Charles : « Il faut une vision claire de nos objectifs et de ce que nous voulons accomplir avec notre projet. Lorsque je négocie avec Ferrari, c'est comme si j'étais totalement transparent, puisque c'est l'écurie pour laquelle je cours actuellement. Je connais précisément la vision, ce que j'attends de la voiture et ce que l'avenir nous réserve. Cela me rend très optimiste. » #F1 #FormulaPassion #Ferrari #F1 #Formule1

“Socialism Was Good in Theory” That sentence assumes the theory was never seriously challenged. It was. Long before the Soviet Union existed, before Lenin seized power, and before socialism had been tested on a national scale, major thinkers were already attacking its foundations—from very different directions. Five of them stand out. Tocqueville: Equality Can Become Servitude In 1848, Alexis de Tocqueville drew a sharp distinction between democracy and socialism. Both spoke about equality. But Tocqueville believed they pursued it in fundamentally different ways. Democracy, in his view, sought equality while preserving individual freedom. Socialism risked achieving equality by expanding the power of the state over the individual. His warning was essentially this: equality is not automatically liberty. A society can pursue equality so aggressively that it begins sacrificing the independence that makes political freedom meaningful. Bastiat: Follow Where Redistribution Leads Two years later, Frédéric Bastiat attacked socialism from a different direction. His question was deceptively simple: What happens when the state acquires the authority to take from some people and give to others in the name of justice? Bastiat called this “legal plunder.” His concern was not merely that redistribution might be expensive. It was that once government becomes the instrument through which competing groups obtain benefits from one another, politics can turn into a permanent struggle over who controls the machinery of redistribution. The problem, therefore, wasn’t simply how much the state redistributed. It was the principle that made redistribution legitimate in the first place. (bastiat.org⁠) Nietzsche: Equality Can Become Resentment Nietzsche approached socialism neither as an economist nor as a constitutional theorist. He attacked its psychology. He saw modern egalitarian movements as part of a much older moral impulse: resentment toward exceptional individuals and suspicion of strength, ambition and hierarchy. For Nietzsche, the danger was not simply that everyone might become economically equal. It was that a culture could begin treating excellence itself as something morally suspect. The goal would cease to be lifting people upward. It would become bringing the exceptional downward. Böhm-Bawerk: Challenge the Economics Then came Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk. In 1896, he turned his attention specifically toward Marx’s economic system. His criticism was not primarily moral or political. It was technical. Böhm-Bawerk argued that Marx’s theory of value did not adequately explain how the labor values developed in Capital could be reconciled with the actual prices Marx subsequently needed to explain. In other words, he attacked socialism where it claimed to possess a scientific economic foundation. The argument became one of the central criticisms of Marxian economics and helped launch a debate that would continue for generations. Mises: The Calculation Problem Then, in 1920, Ludwig von Mises attacked an even more fundamental question: Even if socialism is morally desirable, how would a socialist economy actually know what to produce? A functioning economy has millions of competing uses for scarce resources. Build a bridge or a hospital? Use steel here or there? Produce more machinery or more consumer goods? Under private ownership and markets, prices for capital goods provide information about relative scarcity and opportunity costs. Mises argued that abolishing private ownership of the means of production also removes the genuine market prices necessary for rational economic calculation. The problem wasn’t simply that socialist planners might make bad decisions. It was that the system deprived them of the very economic signals required to systematically compare those decisions. (Mises Institute⁠) And that was the sequence. Tocqueville challenged the political premise. Bastiat challenged the moral and legal mechanism of redistribution. Nietzsche challenged the psychology behind egalitarianism. Böhm-Bawerk challenged Marx’s economic theory. Mises challenged the possibility of rational central economic calculation. Five different thinkers. Five different objections. And all of them came before the Soviet Union had demonstrated what large-scale socialist government would actually look like. So “socialism was good in theory, but bad in practice” is not an argument. It is a historical claim that requires you to explain why these theoretical objections were wrong. The interesting question isn’t whether socialism had critics. It did. The interesting question is whether socialism ever adequately answered them” - ChatGPT